The following appeared as a recommendation by a committee planning a ten-year budget for the city of Calatrava.
"The birthrate in our city is declining: in fact, last year's birthrate was only one-half that of five years ago. Thus the number of students enrolled in our public schools will soon decrease dramatically, and we can safely reduce the funds budgeted for education during the next decade. At the same time, we can reduce funding for athletic playing fields and other recreational facilities. As a result, we will have sufficient money to fund city facilities and programs used primarily by adults, since we can expect the adult population of the city to increase."
Write a response in which you discuss what specific evidence is needed to evaluate the argument and explain how the evidence would weaken or strengthen the argument.
The argument attempts to bridge a relationship between the fact that last years' birthrate was only one-half that of five years ago and the suggestion to reduce funds for education, sports and recreation next decade. However, on deeper analysis, there are certain important question unanswered and facts unnoticed, leading to a number of mistaken assumptions and logical flaws.
The argument assumes that because of a lower birthrate compared to five years ago the numbers of students in public schools will decrease dramatically. Of course, because of a lower birthrate, there are not that many potential students but this will not say that there will be less students in the future. The percentage of children who enrolled in public schools is increasing.
In addition, there are only numbers known of last year and five years ago. It is possible that last year and five years ago where not average. If this year was quite bad and five years ago was quite good there is not a proper reflexion on the current state of birthrate. Moreover comparing two years with each other does not give any details about a trend. There is definitely more information required to make a solid and reliable argument. In addition, there is only known something about one particular city. The situation in this city does not have to be represented by a whole country or area. If students in Calatrava are not only residents of Calatrava this is an important detail.
The paper also attempts to reduce funding for athletic playing fields and other recreational facilities. In this case the paper suggests that only children make use of them. Recreational facilities like theatres, bars and cafes are mainly visited by adults.
To conclude, the paper does not make clear assumptions about the relationship between numbers of birth this year and the group of children next decade. Also the fact that they will reduce funding for recreational facilities that are also used by adults. The argument lacks information and seems to provide inchoate assumptions. The paper must have presented more concrete evidence about numbers of birth in the past years and have to be more specific in terms of recreational facilities.
Then, the argument would be more cogent.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 75, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'years'' or 'year's'?
Suggestion: years'; year's
...relationship between the fact that last years birthrate was only one-half that of fiv...
^^^^^
Line 3, column 278, Rule ID: FEWER_LESS[2]
Message: Did you mean 'fewer'? The noun students is countable.
Suggestion: fewer
...ut this will not say that there will be less students in the future. The percentage ...
^^^^
Line 5, column 272, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Moreover,
...xion on the current state of birthrate. Moreover comparing two years with each other doe...
^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 600, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “If” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
...represented by a whole country or area. If students in Calatrava are not only resi...
^^
Line 8, column 153, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Also,
... and the group of children next decade. Also the fact that they will reduce funding ...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, however, if, moreover, so, then, in addition, of course
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 19.0 19.6327345309 97% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 12.9520958084 46% => OK
Conjunction : 15.0 11.1786427146 134% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 13.6137724551 81% => OK
Pronoun: 18.0 28.8173652695 62% => OK
Preposition: 49.0 55.5748502994 88% => OK
Nominalization: 15.0 16.3942115768 91% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1882.0 2260.96107784 83% => OK
No of words: 370.0 441.139720559 84% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.08648648649 5.12650576532 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.38581623665 4.56307096286 96% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.68207806223 2.78398813304 96% => OK
Unique words: 171.0 204.123752495 84% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.462162162162 0.468620217663 99% => OK
syllable_count: 594.9 705.55239521 84% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 4.96107784431 20% => OK
Interrogative: 0.0 0.471057884232 0% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.76447105788 103% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.70958083832 111% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 4.22255489022 166% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 21.0 19.7664670659 106% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 22.8473053892 74% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 42.7764319369 57.8364921388 74% => OK
Chars per sentence: 89.619047619 119.503703932 75% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.619047619 23.324526521 76% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.14285714286 5.70786347227 55% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 6.0 5.15768463074 116% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 5.25449101796 95% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 8.20758483034 61% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 6.88822355289 102% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 9.0 4.67664670659 192% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.316920076972 0.218282227539 145% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0938283295568 0.0743258471296 126% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.109013450988 0.0701772020484 155% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.143037094065 0.128457276422 111% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.12112333165 0.0628817314937 193% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.4 14.3799401198 79% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 54.22 48.3550499002 112% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 12.197005988 81% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.95 12.5979740519 95% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.77 8.32208582834 93% => OK
difficult_words: 77.0 98.500998004 78% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 12.3882235529 113% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 11.1389221557 79% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.9071856287 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 Out of 6 -- The score is based on the average performance of 20,000 argument essays. This e-grader is not smart enough to check on arguments.
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.